<?php
/**
 * <https://y.st./>
 * Copyright © 2018 Alex Yst <mailto:copyright@y.st>
 * 
 * This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
 * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
 * the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
 * (at your option) any later version.
 * 
 * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
 * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
 * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
 * GNU General Public License for more details.
 * 
 * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
 * along with this program. If not, see <https://www.gnu.org./licenses/>.
**/

$xhtml = array(
	'<{title}>' => 'Staples on the road',
	'takedown' => '2017-11-01',
	'<{body}>' => <<<END
<img src="/img/CC_BY-SA_4.0/y.st./weblog/2018/06/26.jpg" alt="A small field lined with trees" class="framed-centred-image" width="649" height="480"/>
<section id="drudgery">
	<h2>Drudgery</h2>
	<p>
		My discussion post for the day:
	</p>
	<blockquote>
		<p>
			Yeah, I&apos;d think it&apos;s the right decision to use the discussion assignment from the learning guide as well.
			If you use the posted discussion assignment instead, it matches the learning journal assignment to the letter.
			You&apos;d be doing the same work twice, instead of two separate assignments once each.
		</p>
		<p>
			One of the most powerful aspects of literature is that when details are unimportant or deliberately need to be kept secret from the reader, those details can just be left out.
			I haven&apos;t watched television in years, but I used to notice that scenes would be shot that were intentionally not what had supposedly happened, so important details wouldn&apos;t leak early.
			Then you cue the flashback later on in the episode and you see that something entirely different happened.
			You could re-watch episodes you&apos;d already watched and see all the times the director had not mislead the viewer, but outright <strong>*lied*</strong> to the viewer.
			All it would take is a different camera angle to avoid lying while also avoiding the plot spoiler, but it makes it obvious something is going on and draws attention to aspects the viewer might not otherwise catch.
			Most people don&apos;t seem to care,but it was always something that irked me.
			With literature, this sort of lie isn&apos;t necessary or even useful.
			Also, like with the time and place in the story you read, details can be left out to avoid tying up the reader with specifics that don&apos;t really matter.
		</p>
	</blockquote>
</section>
<section id="recipe">
	<h2>Ranch dressing abomination</h2>
	<p>
		My abomination of a ranch dressing experiment failed.
		It separated just like the other attempts.
		This time was different though.
		In every other batch that separated, the strange, transparent, yellow liquid formed a smooth surface at the bottom of the jar.
		But this stuff ...
		The transparent yellow layer wasn&apos;t quite at the bottom.
		It had ranch-looking liquid both above and below it.
		And the layer itself was jagged.
		I&apos;m not even sure how that could happen.
		Anyway, it&apos;s clear that the cornstarch isn&apos;t preventing separation as I&apos;d tried to use it to do.
	</p>
</section>
<section id="flat">
	<h2>Flat tire</h2>
	<p>
		The back tire on my bike&apos;s been beyond the point of bald for a while now.
		I&apos;ve been able to see the fibres poking through the rubber in spots.
		Last time I ignored my bald tires, I ended up stranded in Eugene without a working bike because one of the tires wore all the way through on my way to the queer pride festival and I found the inner tube broken when I grabbed the bike after the festivities.
		So this time, I intended to do something about the problem sooner.
		I&apos;ve been meaning to replace the worn tire, but when I went to the store for a replacement, I remembered I&apos;ve got some bike wheels at home that might have tires that&apos;d fit.
		And when I&apos;m at home, I forget I&apos;ve already got a couple potential replacements in the form of the tires on those wheels, and think I need to grab a new tire when I&apos;m at the store.
		Anyway, while running errands today, the inner tube gave out on me.
		I assumed it was because it had finally come into direct contact with the road because the tire had finally worn through.
		I was too late.
		I hadn&apos;t even made it to my first destination yet, so I ended up running my errands on foot, walking the bike most of the way.
	</p>
	<p>
		Once I arrived back home, I finally compared the tires on the spare wheels to the tire on the bike&apos;s main wheels.
		The spare wheels themselves are too big, so the tires don&apos;t fit.
		I should&apos;ve gotten the replacement last time I was at the store after all, and if I&apos;d checked the spares sooner, I&apos;d&apos;ve known that.
		Pulling the old tire off wasn&apos;t good enough for me though.
		I had to find the worn spot for some reason.
		I guess I wanted to see how bad it was, even though there&apos;s no way to repair the tire so it didn&apos;t matter.
		What I found though was no worn-through spot, but a staple!
		I&apos;d run over a staple on the road and it&apos;d poked through the tire and punctured the inner tube.
		Would a replacement tire have been thick enough to prevent the staple from going all the way through?
		Maybe, maybe not.
		In any case, the problem wasn&apos;t that the tire had worn through, but the visible threads from within the tire means it&apos;s still time for a replacement.
		If I weren&apos;t me, I&apos;d&apos;ve replaced that ages ago, but I always try to get more use out of things before replacing them than most people do.
		I picked up the replacement after work, and I&apos;ll need to get it put on before Thursday night for my $a[EUGLUG] meeting.
	</p>
</section>
END
);
